Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 18:37:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <kfl at keithlynch.net>
To: WSFAlist at keithlynch.net
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Netiquette
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>

I don't think there's any WSFA netiquette distinct from any other
netiquette.

It's important to know your audience.  Avoid using acronyms, phrases,
terms, or in-jokes that many of them won't understand.

Personally, I almost totally avoid acronyms (except for things like
"WSFA" on the WSFA list, or acronyms that have become words such as
radar and laser, or acronyms that are better known than what they
stand for, such as FBI and DNA).  I'm a reasonably fast typist, and
disk space and bandwidth aren't all that scarce or precious.  The
standard English language works for me, and I seldom feel the need
to descend into whatever Jargon this week's _Wired_ or _Newsweek_
magazine claims will prove I'm part of the "in" crowd on the net.

I use _underscores_ for book, magazine, and movie titles, "quotes" for
short story titles, and *stars* or UPPERCASE for emphasis.  It works
for me.  Many other variations also work.  So long as your meaning is
clear.

I use angle brackets at the start of each line to quote text that I'm
replying to, to establish context.  This is Usenet style.  Indenting
quoted text is also common.  That's the old ARPAnet style, borrowed
from usage in books.  I also sometimes see the quoted person's
initials before an angle bracket.  That's BBS style.  Some people use
other techniques, such as vertical bars instead of angle brackets.
All of these are fine.  Just so long as it's clear who is saying what.

What doesn't work as well is:

* Quoting none of what you're replying to, unless your message is
  pretty much self-contained, as this one is.  A message simply saying
  "I agree" or "you're wrong" with no indication of what it's in
  response to isn't very interesting.

* Quoting ALL of what you're replying to.  A number of people on this
  list have been guilty of this one.  Nobody needs to see another
  entire copy of the message being replied to.  You never see this
  usage in fanzines, magazines, or books.  There's a reason for this.
  This causes message bloat, which has already driven several people
  away, and caused some mailboxes to overflow.  Please quote the
  minimum necessary to establish context for your reply.

* "Bottom-quoting":  Placing the text being replied to after your
  reply, instead of before it or mixed with it.  Once again, several
  people here have been doing this.  Except for "AHEAD STOP" written
  on roads, no English speakers read bottom-up.

* Doing nothing to set off quoted text from your response to it,
  making it impossible for readers to tell who is saying what.
  One person here has been doing this.

As I may have mentioned before, nothing but plain text should ever be
sent in email, except by pre-arrangement with the recipient.  Ted is
mistaken when he says HTML email is displacing plain-text email.  The
trend is in the other direction.  HTML email is being phased out, like
punched cards, "high tech" OCR fonts, dot matrix printers, DIVX discs,
and various other waves of the future.  More and more people, lists,
and whole ISPs are discarding all such email unread, because of spam,
bloat, viruses, and web-bugs.  Similarly with email with attachments.

Keep your lines less than 80 columns wide.

The most important rule of all is to never spread chain letters, as
they can create exponentially growing waves of devastation.  Not just
the ones that promise great wealth, but also the ones that warn of
viruses, draconian new laws, or other threats such as "blue star" LSD.
Or that masquerade as petitions or charities.  Especially when there's
no explicit contact information, and no expiration date.

A usage you'll sometimes see in the rec.arts.sf.fandom newsgroup
(often abbreviated rasff):  "AOL" meaning "me too" or "I agree".
It comes from the stereotype of the AOL user who replies to a long
message by including every word of the message, and then just adding
a one line reply indicating agreement.

Also see my page http://keithlynch.net/netvision.html
--
Keith F. Lynch - kfl at keithlynch.net - http://keithlynch.net/
I always welcome replies to my e-mail, postings, and web pages, but
unsolicited bulk e-mail (spam) is not acceptable.  Please do not send me
HTML, "rich text," or attachments, as all such email is discarded unread.